RE: Does This Violate UPA?

• From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
• Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 10:00:57 -0800
• To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F8040EF745@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

My mistake. I meant I believe the answer is Yes. A brief distraction made me mix up the definition of particle. 

 -----Original Message----- 
 From: Dare Obasanjo 
 Sent: Tue 11/5/2002 9:58 AM 
 To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org 
 Cc: 
 Subject: Does This Violate UPA?
 
 
 <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" 
 elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
  
  <xs:element name="foo" type="xs:string" />
  
 <xs:element name="root">
  <xs:complexType>
   <xs:sequence>
    <xs:element ref="foo" maxOccurs="3"/>
    <xs:element ref="foo" />
   </xs:sequence>
   </xs:complexType>
  </xs:element>
  
 </xs:schema>
  
 I believe the answer is No but can conceive of how this might be considered a gray area. It gets much grayer if both <foo>'s are local declarations. 
  
  

Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 13:01:27 UTC